Subj : C is the most efficient p
To : Boraxman
From : Dr. What
Date : Fri Dec 31 2021 08:32 am
-=> Boraxman wrote to Dr. What <=-
Bo> Was HLA (High Level Assembly) one of those? I did look into it, but I
Bo> always preferred to be explicit about the instructions I used. When I
Bo> use assembler, it is because I am targetting an explicit instruction
Bo> set and want to make the decisions about which instructions to use
Bo> myself. The one time I thought a "generic" solution would be useful is
Bo> when I want assembler that runs on both 32bit and 64bit Intel natively.
I never really got into assembly language other than to know it was there.
I've learned much more as I've been doing more research into the history of
PCs.
I went from BASIC as a kid, straight to FORTRAN, Pascal, LISP, C and more.
I think I did one class in Univac assembly in college. But it was mainly to
know what was happening "under the hood" when we worked in the higher level
languages.
I did work on some FORTRAN programs for GM 20+ years ago that used an assembly
language subprogram that was self-modifying. The computer had a fancy
instruction they needed to use, but the assembler didn't support it, so they
wrote their subprogram to modify itself to use the fancy instruction the first
time it was called.
Assembler was mostly frowned upon in my work because of the time and resources
it took to use it. People time was more expsensive than computer time.
... I'm spending a year dead for tax purposes.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
� Synchronet � Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA
